What will Linux become?

[rcrsn51]

A near-infinite supply always tends towards zero demand.

What economic theory is that?

[nooby]

" Maybe the only thing wrong with Puppy is that users' expectations
tend to exceed the developer's intentions."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Kauler

That is so true. Did happen to me too and slowly I have accepted that it is the Devs that decide on things and not the user. I was so wrong. Dead wrong. I am a slow learner though so may slip back now and then.

[TheAsterisk!]

A near-infinite supply always tends towards zero demand.

What economic theory is that?

I think he's confusing the descriptive inverse relationship of supply and demand in classical, 100-level economic theory with an analogous causal relationship, and then applying that idea broadly, but that's just my guess from his tone.

[Sylvander]

Price elasticity of demand:

As I understand it...
IF/when there is "Price elasticity of demand"...
[Then if you had a huge supply available...]
And you reduced the price...
Then demand would increase.
[To make use of the huge supply]

[sc0ttman]

To correct anyone you'd first have to know something about copyrights.

Thanks for the rudeness, but I wasn't entering into a serious discussion about copyright law, merely noting that I find it interesting to see some of the images and symbols which have been 'protected' over the years... I did not once say there were copyrighted or trademarked.

Another thing I find interesting that you can do as you like with, is the first political map, a non-literal future-map of the landscape, carved into a rock in spain, protected by force..

So yes, many of these symbols were often 'protected' - but by force, not law.
Even the 'reefs', rj... haha

[Bernie_by_the_Sea]

A near-infinite supply always tends towards zero demand.

Your problem is twofold: you've used two meanings of "demand," one which hinges upon market and retail value and one which you have used to denigrate the worth of Linux, and you ignore that I am addressing the notion of causality and consequence. The inverse relationship between supply and demand does indeed hold, but my point is a sort of chicken-v-egg thing, in that the demand ($) in this case is low as a result of the huge supply, and not- as you seem to claim- that the demand is low because of technical and practical inferiority.

Your problem is that you're too wordy and misuse technical expressions. Linux is worth what it is and my words have nothing to do with its market value or public demand for it. Modern quantum physics questions the notion of causality which is based on thought from two thousand years ago. I made no “claim

[Bernie_by_the_Sea]

A near-infinite supply always tends towards zero demand.

What economic theory is that?

It's called the Law of Supply and Demand, about the only "law" in the soft sciences that has some validity. Supply goes up, demand goes down. Supply goes down, demand goes up.

[rcrsn51]

It's called the Law of Supply and Demand, about the only "law" in the soft sciences that has some validity. Supply goes up, demand goes down. Supply goes down, demand goes up.

No.

Price goes up, demand goes down. Price goes down, demand goes up.

For example, my local utility company can supply an almost unlimited amount of water. But that has zero effect on the demand for water. It's the price they charge that determines how much water people use.

OTOH, a municipality with limited water supply would surely have lower demand - either because people couldn't afford the water or they practised conservation.

Or consider this scenario. Chip manufacturers could collude to keep supply low and prices artificially high. This would reduce demand because consumers could not afford them and other manufacturers would not use them in new products. But the manufacturers know that, once they have recouped their initial R&D costs, it's in their best interests to use economies of scale to produce all the product that the market demands.

In both cases, supply varies directly with demand, not inversely.

[Bernie_by_the_Sea]

It's called the Law of Supply and Demand, about the only "law" in the soft sciences that has some validity. Supply goes up, demand goes down. Supply goes down, demand goes up.

No.

Price goes up, demand goes down. Price goes down, demand goes up.

For example, my local utility company can supply an almost unlimited amount of water. But that has zero effect on the demand for water. It's the price they charge that determines how much water people use.

OTOH, a municipality with limited water supply would surely have lower demand - either because people couldn't afford the water or they practised conservation.

Not exactly.

Price is an interaction between both supply and demand. It is an effect, not a cause.

Supply and demand is a balance of the objective (supply) and the subjective (demand).

Your statements, "Price goes up, demand goes down. Price goes down, demand goes up." say nothing about supply but only talks of demand, the subjective factor.

[rcrsn51]

A near-infinite supply always tends towards zero demand.

Please provide examples.

[disciple]

Price is an interaction between both supply and demand. It is an effect, not a cause.

Right, so the law is about the combined effect of supply and demand on price. But it was you that said supply affects demand:

A near-infinite supply always tends towards zero demand.

And price affects demand:

People will accept some things free that they aren't willing to buy.

The latter statement is essentially the same as what rcrsn then said

Price goes down, demand goes up

[disciple]

Regarding backward compatibility, most Puppy users are using hardware which would no longer be supported by Windows Vista or 7, or Office 2007, 2010, or probably 2003. A number are using hardware which would struggle with Windows XP.

Today’s Puppy pet won’t work with 2.12

Maybe not, in which case the pet isn't backward compatible with 2.12, but if someone really needs to use 2.12 it could be compiled for 2.12.
And to a point you're right - linux people don't normally care much about backwards compatibility of binary packages, because there is no need for it. Everyone can run the latest version of the OS because it is still backward compatible with their hardware.

and the 2.14 pups won’t work with Lucid

You mean because you haven't installed the necessary dependencies on Lucid?

Oh, wait, Puppy can't handle the vast majority of Linux apps.

Puppy should be able to handle (almost?) all Linux apps.
Puppy doesn't have a proper repository that anyone can contribute to, and many apps are not packaged (because they are too bloated or whatever to suit the Puppy way), so unless you are running a Puppy that can use another distro's repositories you would have to build many of them and their dependencies yourself.
This is how Puppy is. But a normal distro is not like this.
And I can assure you it is a lot less painful to get the software I want installed on Puppy than on Windows

[Bernie_by_the_Sea]

One, I’ll post examples of Supply and Demand later. I need to think more about that. I haven’t discussed economics in forty years. I think I may use water as my prime example.

Two, Microsoft is winning its war against Linux. Linux is often thought to hold the server market, yet in legal documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission Microsoft reported Windows Server has had twenty quarters of consecutive double-digit growth. There’s a definite shift from Linux to Windows on servers. Linux on desktops has never captured 2% of the market and despite all the propaganda from Ubuntu that usage likely dropped by as much as half to around 1% in the past three years.

Three,

Regarding backward compatibility, most Puppy users are using hardware which would no longer be supported by Windows Vista or 7, or Office 2007, 2010, or probably 2003. A number are using hardware which would struggle with Windows XP.

How do you know what hardware most Puppy users have? Seriously. Some here talk of having a 2.8Ghz processor with 4GB RAM and Puppy has 64-bit versions. I started with Wary and I have a modern computer. I have XP and Office 2000 (both the Pro versions) but mine could handle Win7 and Office 2010. I also use DSL with even fewer requirements than Puppy.

Exactly why would a person need an OS other than the one that came with the machine? Why would a person who purchased a legal copy of Office 2010 (list $279.99, street $200) have trouble buying the hardware to use it? Yes, I do know most people using "old" hardware are better off with Linux, much better off even. I doubt that people using old hardware really need or use Office all that much.

And I can assure you it is a lot less painful to get the software I want installed on Puppy than on Windows

I’ve had more trouble installing software in Puppy in three months than I ever had in using Windows since 3.1 in 1992. I’ve had more trouble installing software in Puppy in three months than I ever had in using any version of Linux. The Preview editions of PCLOS were a bit of a hassle but no where nearly as bad as Puppy. Debian and Mepis were almost as good as Windows. Poor old Lindows that I used for a while in ‘04, a Linux product that cost real money and was a great idea in design but a marketing bust, worked just as well as Windows. It had over 38,000 apps in its repository at its peak. Access cost $20 a year for the basic tier, $50 a year for gold with one click installation. The Linux OpenSourcers hated it and Microsoft sued them over the name but ended up having to pay them about 20 million dollars.

[disciple]

Regarding backward compatibility, most Puppy users are using hardware which would no longer be supported by Windows Vista or 7, or Office 2007, 2010, or probably 2003. A number are using hardware which would struggle with Windows XP.

How do you know what hardware most Puppy users have?

Yes, you're right. I have no way of knowing this. That is my guess based on my observations from hanging around this forum as much as I do. I could be completely wrong.

Exactly why would a person need an OS other than the one that came with the machine?

1. They might have become sick and tired of fixing the rubbish OS that came with the machine.
2. They might want or need support for hardware or software which is not supported on their vintage OS.
3. They might believe the standard line that everything needs to be up-to-date for "security".
I'm sure there are other reasons.

Why would a person who purchased a legal copy of Office 2010 (list $279.99, street $200) have trouble buying the hardware to use it?

Nobody said anything to this effect. And BTW I would never buy Office 2007 or 2010 - I use it all the time and it is a heap of junk.

Yes, I do know most people using "old" hardware are better off with Linux, much better off even. I doubt that people using old hardware really need or use Office all that much.

Well, some of us agreed above that an office suite is the software people are most likely to need, other than a browser. If you think they don't even need an office suite, then what do they need?
And why on earth would everyone want to dispose of all their old hardware just so they can run modern software? Because most users don't do any serious computing there is no other advantage in upgrading hardware, so businesses around here tend to hang onto their old hardware until they are forced to upgrade because they think they need to run the latest Microsoft software.

I’ve had more trouble installing software in Puppy in three months than I ever had in using any version of Linux.

Yes, as I said above, depending on what you want to install, that's what I'd expect, given that on most distros a user would very rarely compile anything themself.

[Aitch]

Bernie....you say

Modern quantum physics questions the notion of causality

then later refer to 'reality'

Surely as a fan of modern quantum physics, you know most Scientists/Physicists rail at a notion of 'reality' more than causality?

The only reality you make me aware of, is that this thread has more posts by you, causally making the reality of this thread go off track....

Perhaps we need a Quantum Physics Puppy...?

btw....your linux ideas are absolutely wacky, IMHO

Linux failed in the marketplace (and there were dozens of Linux distros that sold for cash). Its last hope was giving it away.

It is not Linux which fails in the marketplace...it is the market itself, and an unreal 'economy' based on equally wacky supply/demand philosophies to yours....well, that and a debt/money 'supply'
Commercial linuxes that fail do so because they don't have global support structures/education programs....but I can't name any

The backbone of the web is VERY commercial, yet in the main runs on linux

Aitch

[jpeps]

I lost any lingering humility many years ago in my 30's when I became a self-made millionaire. After that what others (outside my own family) thought didn't much matter to me. In fact I lost most of my humility in the 1950's when the US Army told me that I was the smartest human being they had ever tested in their labs confirming what two university labs had found.

Intelligence tests are comprised of little tasks that you can measure, like putting together little puzzles, doing arithmetic in your head, recalling strings of numbers forward and backwards, knowledge of vocabulary words, etc.; great for academia. They don't measure talent, creativity, wisdom, social/emotional intelligence, or the ability to utilize information in any meaningful way. Creative brilliance can't be measured. Generally, those with creative talent leave academic institutions fairly quickly, and often do poorly.

[myke]

For those who say Linux is worthless;

Red Hat Inc. Revenue for 4thQ year end March 2011: $244.8M
Profit $33.5M

M=million

Bernie, stop bs'ing.

myke

[TheAsterisk!]

Your problem is that you're too wordy and misuse technical expressions.

Firstly, I'm verbose because it's usually easier to dissuade borderline trolls and/or true believers from continuing the conversation. Secondly, I very well may have misused jargon, but not English; I'm an college student, not an economist or something.

Linux is worth what it is and my words have nothing to do with its market value or public demand for it.

I call bullcrap here. Firstly, "it is what it is" is just a restatement of the identity function ("x=x"), and it's just a tautology in this discussion. Secondly, by bringing up price, "what people want" and arguing in economic terms, you have indeed brought market value and public demand into the discussion.

Modern quantum physics questions the notion of causality which is based on thought from two thousand years ago.

No, it does not. Causality stands, but limitations of the precision of instruments have forced physicists to deal with the particles in terms of probability rather than absolute or relative position. (For example, if the potential error of your measurement of position of a particle is several times the size of the particle, straightforward measurement of position is pretty useless. Instead, you basically predict the likelihood of particles being in certain regions at certain times. Sci-fi writers and bullcrap artists have been misapplying the resulting and ordinary lack of absolute probabilities and outcomes for a long time now.)
Perhaps you've confused my use of the word "causal" for some jargon which uses the term. "Causal," in plain English use, just means something causes something else. You asserted that low demand caused low supply, but I pointed out that the relationship between supply and demand can either be causal as you said, causal in other ways (high supply causes low demand, not the other way around) or can simply be a plain relationship.

I made no “claim

[jonyo]

my first thoughts are chicken feed

[jpeps]

Besides that, IQ tests are amusingly inconsistent and unreliable once you get over 180 or so.

I guess they would be, since scoring generally stops at 150 (although I've seen 155 used).